affirmed hearing (New Mexico) · Go Syfert
← New Mexico issues

affirmed hearing in New Mexico

7 New Mexico opinions name it 1 courts 2003–2024 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New Mexico courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
State Ex Rel. Taxation & Revenue Department Motor Vehicle Division v. Van Ruitengreen
nmctapp · 1988 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003
2 sentences

2003See Van Ruiten, 107 N.M. at 539 , 760 P.2d at 1305 .

2003See Van Ruiten, 107 N.M. at 539 , 760 P.2d at 1305 .

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Mexico. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
Computer One, Inc. v. Grisham & Lawless P.A. green
nm · 2008
2 sentences

2013The district court agreed and granted the motion, id., and this Court affirmed that the claim was a compulsory counterclaim.

2013The district court agreed and granted the motion, id., and this Court affirmed that the claim was a compulsory counterclaim.

42013–2013
Gormley v. Coca-Cola Enterprises green
nmctapp · 2004
2 sentences

2024Id. ¶ 23. 13 {13} Although this case is not binding on our decision here, see Rule 12-405(A) 14 NMRA, due to the similarity of the underlying facts we find it informative.3 Gormley 15 v. Coca-Cola Enters., 2004-NMCA-021, ¶ 10 , 135 N.M. 128 , 85 P.3d 252 (stating 16 that unpublished opinions may be presented and considered as persuasive authority). 17 In this case, just as the taxpayer in Bogle Management Co., Taxpayer had no physical 3 We consider and rely in part on the analysis in Bogle Management Co. because the facts and issues presented and precedent cited by Bogle are nearly identical t

2024Id. ¶ 23. 13 {13} Although this case is not binding on our decision here, see Rule 12-405(A) 14 NMRA, due to the similarity of the underlying facts we find it informative.3 Gormley 15 v. Coca-Cola Enters., 2004-NMCA-021, ¶ 10 , 135 N.M. 128 , 85 P.3d 252 (stating 16 that unpublished opinions may be presented and considered as persuasive authority). 17 In this case, just as the taxpayer in Bogle Management Co., Taxpayer had no physical 3 We consider and rely in part on the analysis in Bogle Management Co. because the facts and issues presented and precedent cited by Bogle are nearly identical t

22024–2024
Florida v. JL green
scotus · 2000
1 sentence

2003Prior to J.L., 529 U.S. 266 , 120 S.Ct. 1375 , this Court affirmed a presumption of reliability in the context of a vehicle stop made pursuant to an anonymous call describing an intoxicated driver.

12003–2003

Statutes the citing opinions construe

USC § 11u.s.c.1109 (4) USC § 11u.s.c.1121 (4) USC § 11u.s.c.330 (4) USC § 28u.s.c.1334 (4)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CA 13 (1901–2026) PA 9 (1956–2019) IN 9 (1892–2009) IL 9 (1870–2007) LA 8 (1910–2018) FL 7 (1933–2017) WA 7 (1931–2025) NM 7 (2003–2024) OH 6 (2007–2020) NC 5 (1915–2025) TX 5 (2009–2020) MO 5 (1912–2025) MT 5 (1928–2000) NY 5 (1852–2007) SD 4 (1929–2009) RI 4 (1987–2019) ME 4 (1979–2019) MI 4 (1970–1995) WI 4 (1980–2002) ID 3 (1912–2007) VT 3 (1970–2004) MA 3 (1993–1999) SC 3 (1995–2008) NJ 3 (1936–2024) CT 3 (1995–2000) KS 3 (1896–1991) MS 3 (2002–2018) OR 2 (1987–2021) NE 2 (1988–2001) UT 2 (1942–1987) HI 2 (2010–2011) MN 2 (1998–2019) GA 2 (1926–2005) OK 2 (1936–2003) ND 2 (1983–2020) MD 2 (1988–2011) IA 2 (2001–2019)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check